Arizona Skeptic - Vol 6 No 2 - 1992

Magazine Overview

Title: The Arizona Skeptic
Issue: Volume 6, Issue 2
Date: September/October 1992
Publisher: Phoenix Skeptics
Focus: Promoting Critical Thinking

How Much of Your Brain Do You Use?

By Mickey Rowe

Mickey Rowe's article delves into the persistent myth that humans use only 10% of their brain's potential. Rowe expresses his difficulty in finding the origin of this claim, noting that it's often attributed to unnamed "experts." He explores three areas: what experts have thought about brain potential, where the belief might have arisen, and what current neuroscience says.

The Mental and the Physical

Rowe traces the historical context to the 19th-century work of Franz Joseph Gall, who proposed that brains are composed of multiple "faculties" and that the size of these faculties correlated with their strength. Gall's ideas, though later associated with the pseudoscience of phrenology, significantly influenced neuroanatomy and psychology. Gall's proposition that "intellectual faculties and cerebral organs executing them are multiple" was endorsed by Samuel Jackson, who stated that the evidence from morbid phenomena of the nervous system was "conclusive."

Gall's belief that the size of different brain regions was an objective measure of mental ability set the stage for later investigations into the physical basis of intelligence. Much effort was spent trying to correlate skull bumps (phrenology) or brain size/weight with intelligence. When these proved elusive, researchers measured parts of the brain, including surface area and mass, attempting to link these physical aspects to mental ability. The implicit assumption was that greater intelligence stemmed from larger brain parts or more training of those parts. Rowe questions this, noting that if the 10% hypothesis were true and assumption (a) (larger brain parts equal higher intelligence) were correct, then correlating brain size with intelligence might make sense. However, if assumption (b) (brain parts grow with use) were correct, it would be illogical to claim we only use a portion of our brains, as use would imply pushing them to their limits.

Who Said What?

Rowe suggests that the "10% hypothesis" might have originated from misquotations or misinterpretations of scientific findings. He recounts an anecdote about Karl Pearson being misquoted by a pressman regarding human "intellectual prime" at age 21.

Several plausible scenarios for the myth's origin are presented:

1. Brain Lesion Studies: Early studies correlating brain damage with dysfunction might have led to the conclusion that some regions were unnecessary if no obvious deficits were observed. Summing up these "unnecessary" regions could have led to the idea that a large portion of the brain is not used. However, Rowe points out that biological systems have redundancy, and the absence of a deficit doesn't mean a region isn't important or can't be used.
2. Brain Stimulation: Exploration by stimulating nervous tissue with electrical currents. While this can elicit sensations, the stimulation is artificial. "Association" areas, where stimulation yielded no particular sensation, were sometimes thought to be unused, potentially leading to the 10% figure.
3. Hydrocephalus: Severe cases where cerebral hemispheres are compressed to about 10% of normal volume without gross intellectual deficits. Rowe clarifies that these brains are compressed, not destroyed, and a compressed brain is not the same as a brain that is 10% of normal size.
4. Non-Neuronal Cells: The fact that non-neuronal cells (glia) outnumber neurons by ten to one. This could be twisted into a claim that "90% of the cells in our brains are not used for thinking."

Rowe concludes that none of these scenarios offer support for the idea of untapped mental potential.

I Hope I Use Less than 10% of My Brain...

Neuroscientists typically respond to the 10% hypothesis with laughter or by recounting the above potential origins. They emphasize that our understanding of the brain-mental ability relationship is still too limited for definitive statements. From a common-sense biological perspective, the hypothesis is likely false, given that the brain is the most energy-intensive organ and biological systems don't invest such efforts needlessly.

Experts often pose the question: "What does it mean to say we only use 10% of our brains, or how would you measure it?" Rowe offers two lines of evidence:

1. Basal Neuron Activity: Most neurons exhibit some basal activity, even at rest, suggesting they are always in use, conveying information about the status quo.
2. PET and SPECT Scanners: These techniques show brain activity. While the 10% myth likely predates these technologies, they provide information about relative activity levels. Studies show that as people improve at tasks, the brain activity required often decreases, suggesting that more efficient individuals might use their brains "less" in terms of effort, not potential.

Rowe speculates that "more intelligent" people might use less of their brains than "less intelligent" people, implying that bragging about using more of your brain might be misplaced.

Further Reading

The article suggests several resources for further reading on brain function, neurophilosophy, and the history of ideas about mental abilities, including Scientific American, P.S. Churchland's "Neurophilosophy," S.J. Gould's "The Mismeasure of Man," and J.D. Davis's "Phrenology: Fad and Science."

Phoenix Skeptics and the Sedona Harmonic Diversion

By Mike Johnson

Mike Johnson recounts his experience visiting Sedona during the Harmonic Convergence, where he claims his car experienced a 20% increase in mileage, attributing it to "psychic vortex" energy. When he presented this to the Phoenix Skeptics, they offered scientific rebuttals, suggesting altitude as the cause. Johnson dismisses this, noting that a trip to Payson (similar altitude) without a vortex yielded a similar effect, leading him to believe Payson also has a psychic vortex. He proposes a new psychic principle: vortices are widespread and their strength is proportional to altitude.

Jehovah's Witnesses and Earthquake Frequency

By John Rand

John Rand critiques the Watchtower Society's claim that earthquakes have increased dramatically since 1914, linking it to end-times prophecy. Rand asserts that data does not support this claim and that the Watchtower Society has misused statistics and misrepresented sources.

He cites an example from the "Awake!" magazine (Feb. 22, 1977) which claimed only 24 major earthquakes occurred between 856 and 1914, versus 43 in the shorter period of 1915-1976, to prove the "end times" theory. Rand counters that reliable sources list thousands of earthquakes for the earlier period and that the 20th century shows no unusual frequency compared to other periods.

Rand also points out that the Watchtower Society quoted an Italian journal, "Il Piccolo," which in turn had quoted the "Awake!" magazine, to "prove" its point about increased seismic activity. This misrepresentation involved altering dates and numbers. He notes that the Watchtower Society used this distorted quote multiple times.

Another example involves Professor Keiiti Aki, a seismologist, whose statement about an "apparent surge" in earthquake intensity and frequency was presented by the Watchtower Society as evidence of a current active period. Rand clarifies that Aki's full statement indicated this surge was likely due to improved recording methods and increased societal vulnerability, and that his true position was that seismicity has been stationary for thousands of years. Aki himself stated that he was trying to convince Jehovah's Witnesses of this, but they selectively quoted him.

Rand also mentions other instances of Watchtower literature distorting facts and debunks end-times predictions using sources like "The Sign of the Last Days-When?"

The Institute for Creation Research and Earthquake Frequency

By Jim Lippard

Jim Lippard discusses the Institute for Creation Research's (ICR) commentary on "end times" earthquake frequency. ICR geologist Steven A. Austin cited biblical earthquakes as signs of momentous events and Jesus' prophecy of "earthquakes in divers places." Austin then seemed to debunk the claim of increasing earthquake frequency himself, stating that the illusion is caused by more frequent detection due to more seismographs. However, he still concluded that earthquakes should be understood as fulfilling "divine purposes."

Lippard notes that it's pleasing to see creationists approaching a debunking, but criticizes the selective use of data and the ultimate conclusion that still aligns with their agenda.

QUAKE DAY - Minus 7

By Mike Jittlov

Mike Jittlov humorously reports on predicted earthquakes for September 1992, based on information from clairvoyant Gordon-Michael Scallion. Scallion's newsletter, "Future Map of the United States," predicts a major earthquake near Palm Springs, another in Sonoma County, and a third in San Diego, along with significant coastline changes and new islands. Jittlov sarcastically expresses his eagerness to receive his copy of the map, humorously noting the potential for his ex-business partner to be submerged.

New Skeptical Group/Magazine

This section announces the formation of the Skeptics Society in Los Angeles, which publishes a quarterly magazine called "Skeptic." The first issue features tributes to Isaac Asimov and articles on skepticism.

Upcoming Meetings

Announces the meeting schedule for the Phoenix Skeptics, including a speaker on the historical Jesus and a topic on predictions for 1993.

Articles of Note

This section provides brief summaries of several articles from other publications:

• Fortean Times Issue 64: Covers topics like a Filipino claiming to be a pregnant hermaphrodite, waterspouts, the "Alternative 3" theory, and Satanic Ritual Abuse allegations.
• Richard A. Kerr, "The Lessons of Dr. Browning," Science 253(August 9, 1991):623-633: Reports on the failed earthquake prediction by climatologist Iben Browning for the New Madrid Fault.
• A prediction of a 1975 earthquake in Wilmington, North Carolina: This prediction also failed to occur.
• Jay Mathews, "The Big One," The New Republic 207(July 27, 1992):26,28: Corrects misinformation about a supposed "megaquake" in California.
• "Circle Hoax Contest," Science 257(July 24, 1992):481: A report on a contest to create realistic crop circles.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The Arizona Skeptic consistently promotes critical thinking, scientific skepticism, and the debunking of pseudoscience and unsubstantiated claims. The magazine actively investigates and analyzes popular myths, religious interpretations of natural phenomena, and paranormal claims, using scientific evidence and logical reasoning to present a more rational perspective. The editorial stance is clearly in favor of evidence-based conclusions and against the acceptance of claims without rigorous scrutiny. The articles in this issue highlight the importance of questioning authority, verifying sources, and understanding the scientific basis behind phenomena, whether it be brain function or earthquake activity.